Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Performance profile of NCAA Division I men’s basketball games and training sessions
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Performance profile of NCAA Division I men’s basketball games and training sessions
Do you wish to request the book?
Performance profile of NCAA Division I men’s basketball games and training sessions
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Performance profile of NCAA Division I men’s basketball games and training sessions
2016
Overview
This study aimed to analyse live and stoppage time phases, their ratio, and action played on half and full court in college basketball games. Differences were assessed for the entire games and between halves. Moreover, differences of the live/stoppage time ratio were analysed between games and game-based conditioning drills. Ten games as well as fifteen defensive, fourteen offensive and six scrimmage-type drills of the same division I men's college team (13 players) were analysed using time-motion analysis technique. Live and stoppage time were classified in five classes of duration: 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, >80 seconds. Half court actions started and finished in the same half court. Full court actions were classified as transfer (TR) phases when at least 3 teammates crossed the mid-court line. TR phases were then classified in 5 classes of frequency: 1TR, 2TR, 3TR, 4TR, and >4TR. The results revealed no statistically significant differences between games or between halves for the considered parameters. The only significant difference was observed for live/stoppage time ratio between halves (p<0.001). Furthermore, a significant difference of the live/stoppage ratio was found between games and game-based drills (p<0.01). Post-hoc analysis demonstrated significant differences of scrimmage-type drills in comparison to games, and defensive and offensive drills (p<0.05), whereas no differences emerged for the other pairwise comparisons. The absence of differences between games in the analysed parameters might be important to characterize the model of performance in division I men's college games. Furthermore, these results encourage coaches to use game-based conditioning drills to replicate the LT/ST ratio documented during games.
Publisher
Termedia Publishing House,Institute of Sport in Warsaw
